Recent legal judgements may make the collection of the hated bedroom tax all but impossible
Crucial definitions of what can and cannot be classed as a bedroom may make the legislation unworkable in a huge embarrassment for the DWP and a marvellous victory for people power.
Overview:
A Tenant had the bedroom tax applied as his landlord and the local council said that he was living in a four bedroom house. The tenant argued that the two of the rooms were too small (60.7 and 69.4 sq/ft) to be classed as bedrooms and that they were used as an art room and a study.
At a tribunal hearing, the tenant raised the precedent from the recently announced Bolton Upper Tribunal. The judge was not aware the recent Bolton Upper Tribunal case for the definition of bedroom and accordingly consulted this case before making his decision. The tenant won their appeal and they are now wholly exempt from the bedroom tax.
The judge ruled that the house can only be considered as a two bedroom house and that the ‘extra’ rooms were too small to let out to a lodger.
Two paragraphs contained in the judgement may signal the death of the bedroom tax.
Paragraph 13 of the judgement concluded that:
‘Bedroom’ is not defined by the legislation. This has most recently been pointed out in the Upper Tribunal decision 2014 UKUT 48 AAC. A(t) paragraph 19 of that decision the Tribunal helpfully refer to various definitions of a bedroom.”
and crucially paragraph 19 concluded that:
“The Tribunal finds that neither of the two smallest rooms are bedrooms. They do not contain beds, they are not used for sleeping, they can only be occupied by a child under 10, a half person…”
You can view the legal documents here.
This has far reaching ramifications for the bedroom tax which in the terms of the judgement may have been wrongly applied to pretty much everyone subject to it.
Consider:
(a ) No local council can now make a bedroom tax decision without first having inspected the property involved. A huge and costly undertaking for which structures, staff and funding do not exist.
(b) All bedroom tax decisions prior to the judgement are potentially vulnerable to appeals, as there is no way that any council could have known whether rooms were used as or furnished as a bedroom.
(c) One could also argue on the basis of the new judgement that under occupancy is impossible. How can a single person have three bedrooms at all? Nobody can tenant sleep in multiple bedrooms simultaneously, hence they can only have one bedroom.
(d) Once the expected tidal wave of appeals starts to loom on the horizon and the cost implications of house inspections becomes clear – its hard to see how much if any money will be actually saved by the DWP – further undermining the legitimacy of the bedroom tax.
The Haze doubts that this story will be covered by the mainstream media so as usual its up to us.
The only way the bedroom tax will survive these historic judgements is if people don’t find out about it. So PLEASE share this news far and wide.
